Dual-beam laser processing system

ABSTRACT

A system for forming two laser processing beams with controlled stability at a target specimen work surface includes first and second mutually coherent laser beams propagating along separate first and second beam paths that are combined to perform an optical property adjustment. The combined laser beams are separated into third and fourth laser beams propagating along separate beam paths and including respective third and fourth main beam components, and one of the third and fourth laser beams contributes a leakage component that copropagates in mutual temporal coherence with the main beam component of the other of the third and fourth laser beams. An effect of mutual temporal coherence of the leakage component and the other main beam component with which the leakage component copropagates is reduced through acousto-optic modulation frequency shifts or through incorporation of an optical path length difference in the two beams.

RELATED APPLICATION

This is a division of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/496,871, filedJul. 31, 2006.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present disclosure relates generally to systems for and methods ofreducing crosstalk in dual-beam, laser processing systems and, morespecifically, to reducing coherent crosstalk present in such systems.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

A dual-beam laser processing system that uses polarized beams derivedfrom a single laser to produce two target specimen processing beams canundergo coherent crosstalk stemming from a significant portion of onebeam leaking into the propagation path of the other beam. Coherentcrosstalk arises when the two beams derived from the single laser arepurposefully combined in a common beam path through a portion of theoptical train and are subsequently reseparated. Because of the coherentnature of the two beams, any leakage of one beam into the propagationpath of the other beam at the reseparation stage leads to coherentcrosstalk, which is substantially more severe than that which would bepresent if the beams were mutually incoherent. Coherent crosstalk causesdegraded pulse energy and power stability control of one or both of thelaser beams at the working surface of the target specimen.

SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE

Embodiments of dual-beam laser processing systems implement techniquesfor reducing crosstalk between two laser processing beams to providethem with controlled stability at a work surface of a target specimen.Such systems each include a laser emitting a beam of light that isdivided into first and second mutually coherent laser beams propagatingalong separate first and second beam paths. The first and secondmutually coherent laser beams are purposefully combined in a common beampath portion of an optical component train to perform an opticalproperty adjustment that is common to the first and second laser beams.The first and second previously combined laser beams are separated intothird and fourth laser beams that propagate along respective third andfourth beam paths. The third and fourth laser beams include respectivethird and fourth main beam components, and one of the third and fourthlaser beams contributes a leakage component that copropagates in mutualtemporal coherence with the main beam component of the other of thethird and fourth laser beams. Several embodiments implement techniquesfor reducing an effect of the mutual temporal coherence of the leakagecomponent and the other of the third and fourth main beam componentswith which the leakage component copropagates to deliver to theworkpiece stabilized first and second processing beams corresponding tothe third and fourth beams.

Two embodiments entail passing one of the first and second mutuallycoherent laser beams through an optical path-length adjuster to reducemutual coherence of the first and second laser beams by introducing anoptical path-length difference between the first and second laser beams.The optical path-length difference is introduced by insertion of an airpath or an optical glass component in the beam path of one of the firstand second laser beams before their recombination. The path lengthdifference is set to be greater than the coherence length of the laserbut not so long as to cause unacceptable differences in beampropagation.

A third embodiment entails passing the first and second laser beamsthrough respective first and second acousto-optic modulators. At leastone of the first and second acousto-optic modulators is adjusted toimpart to the first and second laser beams, and thereby to the leakagecomponent, a change in a difference frequency, Δω, that reduces theeffect of the mutual coherence of the leakage component and the other ofthe third and fourth main beam components on the stability of the firstand second processing beams.

Additional aspects and advantages will be apparent from the followingdetailed description of various preferred embodiments, which proceedswith reference to the accompanying drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic depiction of an embodiment of a dual-beam laserprocessing system.

FIG. 2 displays the dual-beam laser processing system of FIG. 1 showingbeam leakage from one main beam to the other main beam.

FIG. 3 is a diagrammatic depiction of an embodiment of frequency shiftsoccurring in an acousto-optic modulator.

FIG. 4 displays a dual-beam laser processing system such as that of FIG.1, but with an air path of a given length for a first beam beforecombination with a second beam by a polarizing beam splitting cube.

FIG. 5 displays a dual-beam laser processing system such as that of FIG.1, but with an optical path of a given length imparted by a glasscomponent to a first beam before combination with a second beam by apolarizing beam splitting cube.

FIG. 6 is a graph of coherence length versus fringe (or coherencecrosstalk) intensity for a 1343 nm pulsed laser measured using aMichelson interferometer that splits a laser into two optical paths andrecombines them into a common path.

FIGS. 7A and 7B are charts indicating the reduction in crosstalkachievable by introducing a path-length difference in a dual-beam lasersystem.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The embodiments of the present disclosure will be best understood byreference to the drawings, wherein like parts are designated by likenumerals throughout. It will be readily understood that the componentsof the present disclosure, as generally described and illustrated in thefigures herein, could be arranged and designed in a wide variety ofdifferent configurations. Thus, the following more detailed descriptionof the embodiments of the apparatus, system, and method of the presentdisclosure is not intended to limit the scope of the disclosure, but ismerely representative of the various embodiments of the presentdisclosure.

FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic depiction of an embodiment of a dual-beamprocessing system 100, which creates two laser beams for processing atarget specimen or a workpiece 102 (such as a semiconductor wafer, amicrochip, or the like) at a work surface 104. A (preferably pulsed)laser beam 106 emitted by a single laser 110 is incident on a firstpolarizing beam splitter cube (PBSC) 120, from which propagate a firstlaser beam 130 and a second laser beam 140. Nominally, one of the beams130 and 140 is linearly polarized with its electric field vector in theplane of FIG. 1 (P-pol), and the other of the beams 130 and 140 islinearly polarized with its electric field vector normal to the plane ofFIG. 1 (S-pol). Thus, beams 130 and 140 are nominally orthogonallypolarized relative to each other.

First and second beams 130 and 140 are modulated by respectiveacousto-optic modulators (AOMs) 150 and 160 acting as adjustable lightshutters that control the intensity of light passing through them. Laserbeams 130 and 140 reflect off respective turning mirrors 162 and 164 andstrike a second PBSC 170. PBSC 170 recombines laser beams 130 and 140 atan internal beam overlap location 174 and directs them as a combinedbeam propagating along a beam path for incidence on a variable beamexpander (VBE) 180. VBE 180 performs a beam size adjustment that iscommon to both beams 130 and 140, and thereafter directs them to a thirdPBSC 190 for separation. The separated beams propagate from third PBSC190 as a third beam 192 and a fourth beam 194 along separate beam paths.

Third beam 192 and fourth beam 194 propagate through respective powermeasurement/calibration subsystems 196 and 198 that are characterized byfrequency passbands and provide measured beam intensity information thatis useful for specimen processing. Measured beams 192 and 194 reflectoff respective mirrors 200 and 202 for incidence on and combination by afourth PBSC 210. The combined output beams of fourth PBSC 210 propagatethrough an objective lens 218 that forms a first processing beam 220 anda second processing beam 222 for incidence on a work surface 104 of atarget specimen 102. The eventual position, focus height, and size ofeach beam 192 and 194 are adjusted to provide their correspondingprocessing beams 220 and 222 with the desired properties at work surface104 of target specimen 102. It is normally desirable to have equaloptical path lengths for beams 130 and 140 to substantially closelymatch beam propagation effects on the spot size and focus height of eachprocessing beam at work surface 104. However, as will be shown,substantially equal optical path lengths increase mutual crosstalkinterference.

FIG. 2 shows dual-beam processing system 100 of FIG. 1 with beam leakageappearing after third PBSC 190. Beam crosstalk occurs at PBSC 190 when aportion of third beam 192 leaks into the path of fourth beam 194, aportion of fourth beam 194 leaks into the path of third beam 192, orboth. FIG. 2 shows third beam 192 composed of a main beam component 192m and a leakage beam component 194 l leaked from fourth beam 194, andfourth beam 194 composed of a main beam component 194 m and a leakagebeam component 192 l leaked from third beam 192. This leakage occursbecause of the practical limits of polarized beam splitter performance,from imperfect linear polarization of beams 130 and 140, and fromimperfect alignment of beam splitter and beam combiner polarizationaxes. Downstream from PBSC 190, the leakage beam component (194 l or 192l) is indistinguishable from the main beam component (192 or 194) in agiven beam path. Because the leakage beam component is temporallycoherent with the main beam component in each beam path downstream ofPBSC 190, coherent addition between the main and leakage beam componentsoccurs. Such coherent addition of the main and leakage beam componentsleads to significant variation in the total beam intensity, I. Themutual temporal coherence of the main and leakage beam components is ata maximum when the path lengths for first and second beams 130 and 140are equal.

FIG. 3 is a diagrammatic depiction of frequency shifts occurring ineither of AOMs 150 and 160. Use of the frequency and phase shiftingproperties of AOMs 150 and 160 enables configuration of system 100 sothat the frequency of the beam intensity variation resulting fromcoherent crosstalk (beam leakage) is shifted to a frequency that isoutside one or both of the passbands of power measurement/calibrationsubsystems 196 and 198 and laser processing effects.

One of several AOM configurations that effect one or both of such afrequency and phase shift may include: (1) quasi-static operation inwhich the coherent crosstalk level varies slowly, with optional phaseadjustment in which the coherent crosstalk level is minimized byadjusting the relative phase of beams 130 and 140; (2) frequencymodulation by using for each beam a different AOM RF drive frequency, inwhich the coherent crosstalk (or leakage) frequency is made equal to thedifference between the two AOM RF frequencies; and (3) frequencymodulation by using different AOM diffractive orders for beams 130 and140. Each case is further discussed below.

When two beams of intensities I₁ and I₂ overlap, the resultant totalintensity I includes, in addition to the simple sum (I₁+I₂), a coherentaddition or interference term

I _(ac)=2{right arrow over (E)} ₁ ·{right arrow over (E)} ₂ cos(Δωt+φ),

where {right arrow over (E)}₁ and {right arrow over (E)}₂ are theelectric field amplitude vectors for the beam, Δω is the difference inthe frequencies of beams 130 and 140, and φ is a phase term, whicharises from any static phase difference between the two beams 130 and140, path-length differences, and possibly coherence properties of thebeams. The term Δω is also the frequency of the coherent crosstalk.Because of the vector dot product of the electric fields {right arrowover (E)}₁ and {right arrow over (E)}₂ only the polarization componentcommon to both beams 130 and 140 contributes to the crosstalk termI_(ac). To the extent that the crosstalk term I_(ac) cannot beeliminated through use of orthogonal polarizations, its effect oncoherent crosstalk may be reduced by purposefully using properties ofacousto-optic time modulation of light to set the difference frequencyΔω and phase φ to advantageous values. The coherent term I_(ac) mayrepresent a significant leakage term in the overall beam intensity I.For example, if I₁ is the desired main signal intensity, and I₂ is anundesired leakage signal of the same polarization, the total intensitycan be written as

$I = {{I_{1}\left( {1 + \frac{I_{2}}{I_{1}} + {2\sqrt{\frac{I_{2}}{I_{1}}}{\cos \left( {{{\Delta\omega}\; t} + \varphi} \right)}}} \right)}.}$

If, for instance, I₂ is 1% of I₁, then the coherent addition term I_(ac)may be as large as 20% of I₁.

It is known that a light beam of frequency ω_(i) that is diffracted bythe sound field present in an AOM is shifted to a new frequency ω_(n),

ω_(n)=ω_(i) +nω _(s1),

where ω_(s1) is the AOM sound field frequency and n is an integerrepresenting the diffraction order of the AOM being used (n is typically+1 or −1 as shown in FIG. 3, although +2, −2, and even higher orders arepossible). The diffractive order is determined by alignment of the beamto the AOM sound field velocity vector ω_(s). These concepts areillustrated in FIG. 3. Typically, ω_(s1) is on order of 2π*(10⁷ to 10⁸)radians/s. Because the diffraction order and sound field frequency canbe independently controlled for each of AOMs 150 and 160, the frequencydifference term Δω above becomes

Δω=(ω_(i) +nω _(s1))−(ω_(i) +mω _(s2))=nω _(s1) −mω _(s2),

where ω_(s1) and ω_(s2) are the individual AOM sound frequencies, and nand m are the diffraction orders for beams 130 and 140, respectively.

Possible choices for the values of n, m, ω_(s1), and ω_(s2) can besummarized as follows. The first case is where n=m and whereω_(s1)=ω_(s2). In this case Δω=0, and the amplitude of the coherent termI_(ac) simplifies to 2{right arrow over (E)}₁·{right arrow over (E)}₂cos(φ), which will be static or quasi-static depending upon the timebehavior of the relative phase φ. If the path lengths of beams 130 and140 are equal and not changing significantly, then φ will be determinedby the relative phase of the AOM sound fields, which is set by the RFphase driving AOMs 150 and 160. By controlling the relative RF phaseapplied to AOMs 150 and 160, the level of coherent crosstalk can becontrolled, and ideally, nulled to zero. For example, a calibrationprocedure could be used in which the path intensity of beam 192 afterPBSC 190 is measured with beam 140 turned on, and compared with theintensity of beam 192 after PBSC 190 with beam 140 turned off. Therelative phase of the AOM RF signals may be simultaneously adjustedduring these comparative measurements until the phase difference betweenbeam 194 in its ON and OFF states is minimized (effectively settingφ=±π/2). The relative phase may also be adjusted by increasing theoptical path-length difference of one of the beam paths, e.g. 192, inrelation to the other beam path, e.g. 194, before beam cross-overlocation 174, as will be discussed with reference to FIGS. 4-7.

The second case is where n=m and where ω_(s1)≠ω_(s2). By driving the AOMsound fields at different frequencies, the crosstalk term appears at thedifference frequency, given by Δω=ω_(s1)−ω_(s2). Accordingly, Δω canreadily be controlled and set anywhere in the range from 0 Hz to over10⁶ Hz. This would be especially useful where a calibration procedureaverages beam energy over a certain time window T. If Δω>>1/T, then thevariations resulting from coherent crosstalk are effectively averaged.

The third case is where n≠m and where ω_(s1)=ω_(s2). By aligning AOMs150 and 160 to operate on different diffractive orders, the crosstalkterm appears at the difference frequency, given by Δω=(n−m)ω_(s1). Forexample, if n=+1 and m=−1, Δω=2ω_(s1). This advantageously yields arelatively high crosstalk frequency while utilizing one RF oscillator todrive both AOMs 150 and 160, which crosstalk frequency is outside thenominal passbands of the two laser processing beams. For example, withω_(s1)=ω_(s2)=10⁸ radian/s and n=+1 and m=−1, we have Δω=2×10⁸ radian/s.Thus, Δω is significantly higher than other values of Δω available byusing the second case above, making it easier to move the crosstalkfrequency farther outside the passband frequencies of the two laserprocessing beams.

FIG. 4 displays a dual-beam processing system 400, similar to system 100of FIG. 1, but constructed with an air path 404 of a given length forfirst beam 130 before combination with second beam 140 by second PBSC170. FIG. 5 displays a dual-beam laser processing system 500, similar tosystem 100 of FIG. 1, but with an optical path of a given lengthimparted by a glass (or optical refractor) component 504 to first beam130 before combination with second beam 140 by second PBSC 170.

In either FIG. 4 or FIG. 5, the effect of introducing air path 404 orglass component 504 is to add a path-length difference between the beampaths of beams 130 and 140, prior to beam recombination at PBSC 170. Thepath-length difference is greater than the coherence length (Lc) oflaser 110, but not so long as to cause unacceptable differences in beampropagation. Thus, the path-length difference may be incremental andstill have its desired effect. This has the added effect of reducing themutual temporal coherence between one or both pairs of beams 192 m and194 l and beams 194 m and 192 l, and thereby reducing the crosstalkresulting from coherent addition of the two components of each of thebeam pairs. The coherence length (Lc) is the optical path-lengthdifference of a self-interfering laser beam that corresponds to a 50%fringe visibility, where the fringe visibility is defined asV=(I_(max)−I_(min))/(I_(max)+I_(min)) and I_(max) and I_(min) are therespective maximum and minimum fringe intensities.

The optical path-length difference can be introduced as air path 404 inone of the beam paths of beams 130 and 140, as shown in FIG. 4, or byplacing a refractive optical element, such as a piece of optical glass504 of thickness d and refractive index n, in one of the beam paths ofbeams 130 and 140. Optical glass 504 introduces a change in opticalpath-length (n−1)d, as shown in FIG. 5.

When two beams of equal temporal frequencies (Δω=0) and of intensitiesI₁ and I₂ overlap, the resultant total intensity/includes, in additionto the simple sum (I₁+I₂), a coherent addition or interference term

I _(ac)=2{right arrow over (E)} ₁ ·{right arrow over (E)} ₂ cos(φ(t)),

where {right arrow over (E)}₁ and {right arrow over (E)}₂ are theelectric field amplitude vectors for the beam and φ(t) is a phase termthat arises from path-length differences and coherence properties ofbeams 130 and 140. One condition for maximum crosstalk is that bothbeams 130 and 140 travel equal path lengths from the laser to beamoverlap location 174. Under this condition, the phase term φ(t) is arelatively slowly changing function of time as small path-lengthdifference changes occur (on the order of the wavelength of laser 110)resulting from mechanical vibration and thermal effects. That beams 130and 140 travel equal path lengths to beam overlap location 174 may bedesirable for purposes of having highly similar beam propagationcharacteristics such as spot size, beam divergence, and waist location.Therefore, when adding a path-length difference between beams 130 and140, one may limit the difference to prevent large divergences in spotsize, beam divergence, and waist location.

Because of the vector dot product of the electric fields {right arrowover (E)}₁ and {right arrow over (E)}₂, only the polarization componentcommon to both beams 130 and 140 contributes to the crosstalk termI_(ac). To the extent that the crosstalk term I_(ac) cannot beeliminated through use of orthogonal polarizations, its effect oncoherent crosstalk may be reduced by purposefully introducing an opticalpath-length difference in one of beams 130 and 140 upstream from thebeam overlap location 174. This air path introduces a time delay betweenbeams 130 and 140 which, if larger than the coherence time of the lasersource, results in reduced coherent crosstalk. (Physically, the phasefactor φ(t) in the coherent addition undergoes very rapid and randomfluctuations between 0 and 2π as the path-length is increased beyond thecoherence length of the laser, with the result that the cos(φ(t)) termaverages to zero over time periods of interest as determined by thepassbands of power measurement/calibration subsystems 196 and 198.) Theincrease in optical path-length may be accomplished by adding orsubtracting an air path 404, or by inserting a transmitting opticalmaterial 504 with n>1, such as glass, in one of the beam paths of beams130 and 140. The required delay time is of the order of approximately1/Δν, where Δν is the bandwidth of the laser. The delay time t isrelated to the optical path-length difference I by I=ct, where c=speedof light.

FIG. 6 is a graph showing an example of the coherence length of a 1343nm pulsed laser as measured using a Michelson interferometer, whichsplits a laser into two optical paths and then recombines them into acommon path where the total beam intensity I can be measured using adetector. The horizontal axis represents the change in air path-lengthin millimeters, and the vertical axis represents the fringe (or coherentcrosstalk) intensity I_(ac), as indicated by a signal envelope 604,which is a direct measure of the temporal coherence of laser 110 for agiven path-length difference. FIG. 6 indicates that the coherentcrosstalk is most intense where beams 130 and 140, and thus processingbeams 192 and 194, are substantially exactly coherent (i.e., equal pathlengths) and that signal envelope 604 decreases by approximately afactor of 10 for an air path-length difference of +3.5 mm. Byintroducing this modest path-length difference, system 400 may achieve amarked reduction in coherent crosstalk.

FIGS. 7A and 7B are charts showing the reduction in coherent crosstalkachievable by introducing a path-length difference in a dual-beam lasersystem. The horizontal axis represents an increasing number of samples,on a scale of 10,000 samples per point, taken during a test of thecoherent crosstalk present in laser processing beams. The vertical axisrepresents the measured pulse instability at each sample point. Thechart of FIG. 7A shows measured pulse stability for equal path lengths,with the upper pair of data points representing processing laser beams192 and 194 that are relatively unstable when both beams 130 and 140 arein their ON states (coherent crosstalk present) versus the lower pair ofdata points showing greater stability in processing beams 192 and 194when only one of beams 130 and 140 is in its ON state (no coherentcrosstalk possible).

The chart of FIG. 7B shows the same data for a system configuration inwhich 10 mm of fused silica glass (n=1.46) is introduced into one of thebeam paths of beams 130 and 140 with a 4.6 mm path-length difference,showing a substantial reduction in coherent crosstalk.

While specific embodiments and applications of the present disclosurehave been illustrated and described, it is to be understood that thedisclosure is not limited to the precise configuration and componentsdisclosed herein. Various modifications, changes, and variationsapparent to those of skill in the art may be made in the arrangement,operation, and details of the methods and systems of the presentdisclosure disclosed herein without departing from the spirit and scopeof the present disclosure.

1. A dual-beam laser processing system, comprising: a laser sourceemitting a laser beam; a first polarizing beam splitter separating thelaser beam into first and second mutually coherent laser beams; firstand second optical modulators through which pass the respective firstand second mutually coherent laser beams; an optical path-lengthadjuster through which one of the first and second mutually coherentlaser beams pass, the optical path-length adjuster reducing mutualcoherence of the first and second laser beams by introducing an opticalpath-length difference between the first and second laser beams andthereby forming first and second reduced coherency laser beams; a secondpolarizing beam splitter recombining the first and second reducedcoherency laser beams and thereby forming a recombined laser beam; anoptical property adjuster through which the recombined laser beampasses; and a third polarizing beam splitter separating the recombinedlaser beam into third and fourth laser beams for use in processing atarget specimen.
 2. The system of claim 1, in which the optical propertyadjuster comprises a variable beam expander.
 3. The system of claim 1,in which the optical path-length adjuster comprises an air path thatintroduces the optical path-length difference.
 4. The system of claim 1,in which the optical path-length adjuster comprises a refractive opticalelement.
 5. The system of claim 4, in which the refractive opticalelement comprises fused silica glass.
 6. The system of claim 1, in whichthe first and second mutually coherent laser beams have a coherencelength, and in which the optical path-length difference is greater thanthe coherence length.
 7. A dual-beam laser processing system withcontrolled beam stability at a work surface of a target specimen,comprising: a laser source emitting a laser beam; a first polarizingbeam splitter separating the laser beam into first and second laserbeams; first and second acousto-optic modulators through which therespective first and second laser beams pass; a second polarizing beamsplitter recombining the first and second laser beams and therebyforming a recombined laser beam; an optical property adjuster throughwhich the recombined laser beam passes; a third polarizing beam splitterseparating the recombined laser beam into third and fourth laser beamsfor use in processing the target specimen, one of the third and fourthlaser beams contributing a leakage component that copropagates in mutualtemporal coherence with the other of the third and fourth laser beams;and one of the first and second acousto-optic modulators being adjustedto impart to the first and second laser beams, and thereby to theleakage component, a change in a crosstalk frequency, Δω, such that thechange in the crosstalk frequency reduces an effect of the mutualtemporal coherence of the leakage component and the other of the thirdand fourth laser beams with which the leakage component copropogates todeliver to the target specimen stabilized first and second processingbeams corresponding to the third and fourth laser beams.
 8. The systemof claim 7, in which the optical property adjuster comprises a variablebeam expander.
 9. The system of claim 7, in which the one of the firstand second acousto-optic modulators is adjusted to set the crosstalkfrequency, Δω, by driving, respectively, the first and second laserbeams at different frequencies from each other, respectively ω_(s1) andω_(s2), where Δω=ω_(s1)−ω_(s2).
 10. The system of claim 7, in which theone of the first and second acousto-optic modulators is adjusted to setthe crosstalk frequency, Δω, to a diffractive order, n, of the firstacousto-optic modulator to a different diffractive order, m, of thesecond acousto-optic modulator.